CHHAGANLAL KALYANDAS SHAH Vs. JAGJIWANDAS GULABDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from the decision of the First Class Subordinate Judge at Broach in special civil suit No.391 of 1932. The plaintiff herein sued the defendants on a promissory-note dated November 5, 1929, for a sum of Rs. 6,784-13-6. The promissory-note sued upon is signed individually by the three defendants and there is no mention therein of any partnership firm of Chhaganlal Kalyandas. The promissory note, as usual, contains a promise to pay the amount thereof on demand to the plaintiff. The plaintiff sent a notice of demand on October 20, 1932, and filed this suit on non-compliance thereof on November 4, 1932.

(2.) THE defendants filed written statements inter alia pleading that they were agriculturists within the meaning of the term under the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, and alleging that it was agreed at the time when the promissory-note in suit was passed that it was not to be enforced, but that the amount thereof was to be adjusted in the making up of the partnership accounts of the firm of Chhaganlal Kalyandas in which they alleged that the plaintiff himself and his third brother, Pasubhai, were also partners, and that the taking of such partnership accounts was a condition precedent to the attaching of any liability to them on this promissory-note. THEy further denied that the plaintiff being one of the partners in the said firm could maintain the suit as he sought to do.

(3.) IN the written statement the defendants pleaded their status as agriculturists and the plaintiff evidently appears to have got scared at this plea, and in order to avoid it he presented an application to the trial Court on March 4, 1933, praying for an amendment of the plaint. Permission was accordingly granted by the Court and hence he added paragraph 1-A to the plaint, which reads as follows : I-A. There was a firm of Shah Chhaganlal Kalyandas in Broach. The defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 mentioned above were the partners of the same. I the plaintiff had advanced money to the said firm. Accounts of the same were settled and an amount was found duel with interest to me from the said firm. For the payment of the same, all the three partners the defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 mentioned above, executed the suit promissory-note in favour of me the plaintiff. At the top of the plaint, instead of mentioning in brief as the firm of Chhaganlal J Kalyandas, the names of the three partners of the said firm are mentioned for the sake of clarity and in order that no confusion might arise.